Geography

Geography

Measuring the impact of individual, interpersonal, and structural factors on the use of urban parks

Document Type : Research extracted From projects

Authors
Department of Urban and Rural Planning, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Mohaghegh Ardabili, Ardabil, Iran.
Abstract
Extended Abstract 
Introduction
Urban green spaces are an important part of the socio-ecological landscape in cities and include parks, forests, gardens, walkways and greenways (Taylor & Hochuli, 2017: 26). In 2018, more than half of the world’s population lived in urban areas, and by 2050, two out of three people are expected to live in cities (Zhang etal, 2022: 1). Unfortunately, citizens are not only significantly deprived of the benefits of nature, but are also regularly affected by the adverse effects of rapid and unplanned urbanization (Bowler etal, 2010: 2 ; Evans, 2003: 536). Urban parks are vital assets that have beneficial effects on the physical and mental health of users (Bolitzer & Netusil, 2000: 186; Chiesura, 2004: 130 ; Yigitcanlar etal, 2020: 2). Urban green spaces contribute to human well-being through social interactions and improved mental health (Jennings & Bamkole, 2019: 453; Reyes-Riveros etal, 2021: 1; Taylor & Hochuli, 2015: 748) and provide spaces for recreation and community building. Ecologically, urban green spaces also provide wildlife habitat, reduce storm runoff, mitigate heat island effects, improve air quality, and can provide adaptation mechanisms for climate change (Derkzen etal, 2017: 107). From an environmental perspective, urban green space includes the living part of the physical structure of the city. Therefore, whenever the importance of urban green space in cities that desire to cultivate their culture of development and become developed is properly understood, the logic of design states that there should be a kind of balance between the inanimate and living parts of the physical structure. On the other hand, the creation of green space cannot be planned and designed separately from the needs of the urban community. The most suitable place for the physical and mental renewal of citizens are green and open spaces that are designed and planned to meet these goals (Bahram Soltani, 2019: 147).
 
Methodology
After collecting the questionnaires, the data in them was extracted and the frequency of each option in the questions was determined. After this process, the answers given to the available options (I completely agree, I agree, I have no opinion, I disagree, I completely disagree) were assigned points (4, 3, 0, 2, 1) in order. After applying the scoring averaging process, the score for each indicator was determined and compared with the average score (2/5) and the average score of other indicators, and finally, the summary of the aforementioned process was fully presented in the results section (Vafadari Komarolya etal, 2023: 233). In the data analysis related to the interview section, the structural analysis method was used, and the texts obtained from the interviews were examined word by word and line by line, and the relationship between the codes in them was discovered. Then, these texts were entered into the ATLAS.ti software, and the desired quotations and codings were made, and the relationship between the extracted codes was defined through the tools available in the software, and finally, these relationships were extracted from the software as a model. Then, by combining the results of the quantitative research, namely the questionnaire, and the qualitative research, namely the interview, through the integrated mixed research method, in which the value and position of quantitative and qualitative research are the same and are carried out simultaneously, the homogeneity and consistency of the results of these researches were examined, and the overall result was determined by combining the two quantitative and qualitative researches.
 
Results and Discussion
In general, based on the combination of quantitative and qualitative research results, it can be stated that raising the level of soft landscape or, in other words, increasing greenery in urban parks can be recognized as the most important approach in attracting more citizens to these places. In today's conditions of cities and their heavy traffic, proximity and easy access to urban places and uses are undeniable conditions, so the accessibility of urban parks with appropriate and optimal location of these places and also preparing appropriate conditions for creating security and safety in different directions in urban parks is very important and key. Also, one of the most important conditions for the desirability of a place depends on the facilities available in it, and accordingly, improving recreational and leisure facilities, furniture, lighting and illumination is effective in increasing the use of urban parks. Based on these materials, the importance of the urban park design index, which can include all the indicators mentioned in the research, is clear and evident that by improving this index, the overall desirability of urban parks in attracting and using them by citizens can be increased.
Conclusion
In general, it can be said that the accessibility of urban parks through appropriate and optimal location is the main factor for citizens to visit and use urban parks. In general, the indicators expressed in the three
 
individual, interpersonal, and structural sections can be appropriately considered in urban parks through the design index. This point should be taken into account by urban designers and planners so that they consider and use the indicators proposed in the present study in their designs and planning so that urban parks designed in cities have an acceptable number of visitors and users and also attract their satisfaction.
Keywords

Subjects


  1. Akbari, M. & Eltiyami nia, R. (2021). Analysis of effective Factor in quality of life and well-being in Iran Metropolis. Geography, 19(70), 81-96. [Persian] https://dor.isc.ac/dor/20.1001.1.27172996.1400.19.70.5.5
  2. Azimi, E., Sattarzadeh, D., Bolillan, L., Abdollahzadeh Tarf, A. & Faramarzi Asli, M. (2020). Evaluation of the effect of physical-environmental factors of public spaces on the mental health of citizens (Case study: Ardabil city). jgs. 20(59), 307-319. [Persian] doi: https://doi.org/10.29252/jgs.20.59.307
  3. Bahram Soltani, K. (2019), Environment, Volume 2, Second Edition, Tehran: Shahidi Publications. [Persian]
  4. Bemanian, M., Keshtkar-Ghalati, A., Zarfachi-Shirazi, F. & Mouzisian, Y. (2009). Investigating the determinants of spatial and functional concepts of inner-city parks at the local scale with emphasis on Shafaq Park. Urban Management, 7(24), 37-50. [Persian]
  5. Bolitzer, B. & Netusil, N. (2000). The impact of open spaces on property values in Portland, Oregon. Journal of Environmental Management, 59(3), 185-193.https://doi.org/10.1006/jema.2000.0351
  6. Bowler, D.E., Buyung-Ali, L.M., Knight, T.M. & Pullin, A.S. (2010). A systematic review of evidence for the added benefits to health of exposure to natural environments. BMC Public Health 10 (1), 1–10.https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-10-456
  7. Chiesura, A. (2004). The role of urban parks for the sustainable city, Landscape and Urban Planning, 68(1), 129-138.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2003.08.003
  8. Dai, D. (2011). Racial/ethnic and socioeconomic disparities in urban green space accessibility: Where to intervene?, Landscape and Urban Planning, 102(4), 234-244. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2011.05.002
  9. Derkzen, M.L., van Teeffelen, Astrid, J.A. & Verburg, P.H., (2017). Green infrastructure for urban climate adaptation: how do residents’ views on climate impacts and green infrastructure shape adaptation preferences?, Landsc. Urban Plan. 157, 106–130. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2016.05.027
  10. Evans, G. (2003). The built environment and mental health, Journal of Urban Health, 80, 536-555. https://doi.org/10.1093/jurban/jtg063
  11. Ghalibaf, M., Roostai, M., Ramezanzade, M. & Taheri, M. (2012). Evaluation of the quality of urban life (case study: Yaftabad neighborhood). Geography, 9(31), 33-54. [Persian]
  12. Hosseini, A. & Saberi, A. (2023). The key drivers affecting the quality of life in raw cities (case study: Masiri city). Geography, 21(77), 111-134. [Persian] https://dor.isc.ac/dor/http://dor.net/dor/20.1001.1.27833739.1402.21.77.7.0
  13. James, P., Tzoulas, K., Adams, M., Barber, A., Box, J., Breuste, J., Elmqvist, T., Frith, M., Gordon, C., Greening, K., Hadley, J. Haworth, S., Kazmierczak, A., Johnston, M., Korpela, K., Moretti, M., Niemela, J., Pauleit, S., Roe, M., Sadler, J. & Thompson, W. (2009). Towards an integrated understanding of green space in the European built environment, Urban forestry & Urban greening, 8(2), 65-75.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2009.02.001
  14. Jennings, V. & Bamkole, O. (2019). The relationship between social cohesion and urban green space: an avenue for health promotion. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 16 (3), 452. doi: https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16030452
  15. Liu, H., Li, F., Xu, L. & Han, B. (2017). The impact of socio-demographic, environmental, and individual factors on urban park visitation in Beijing, China, Journal of Cleaner Production, 163, 181-188.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.09.012
  16. Maas, J., Dillen, S., Verheij, R. & Groenewegen, P. (2009). Social contacts as a possible mechanism behind the relation between green space and health, Health & Place, 15(2), 586-595. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthplace.2008.09.006
  17. Maroufi, S. & Bayazidi, Gh. (2021). Evaluation and analysis of factors affecting the improvement of the activity performance of urban parks (case study of Mahabad City Family Park). Environmental Science and Technology, 23(1), 77-92. [Persian] https://doi.org/10.30495/jest.2018.33241.4097
  18. McCormack, G., Rock, M., Toohey, A. & Hignell, D. (2010). Characteristics of urban parks associated with park use and physical activity: A review of qualitative research, Health & Place, 16(4), 712-726.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthplace.2010.03.003
  19. Mowen, A., Payne, L. & Scott, D. (2005). Change and Stability in Park Visitation Constraints Revisited, Leisure Sciences, 27(2), 191-204.https://doi.org/10.1080/01490400590912088
  20. Naroi, B. & Yael, M. (2021). Evaluation of visual and aesthetic preferences of users from the perspective of urban parks (Case study: Sayyad Shirazi Urban Park, Birjand). Human and Environment, 19(2), 219-201. [Persian]
  21. Pinto, L., Ferreira, C. & Pereira, P. (2021). Environmental and socioeconomic factors influencing the use of urban green spaces in Coimbra (Portugal), Science of the Total Environment, 792, 148293. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.148293
  22. Pourahmad, A. & Habibian, B. (2018). Evaluation of factors affecting people's satisfaction with parks in Ahvaz city using the satisfaction-importance model. Spatial Planning, 8(2), 61-80. [Persian] https://doi.org/10.22108/sppl.2018.81102.0
  23. Reyes-Riveros, R., Altamirano, A., De la Barrera, F., Rozas-Vasquez, D., Vieli, L. & Meli, P. (2021). Linking public urban green spaces and human well-being: A systematic review. Urban For. Urban Green. 61, 127105. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2021.127105
  24. Rezaei, M. & Asiyabani, Z. (2018). Evaluating the effectiveness of citizens' participation on the quality of life in urban affairs (case study: Niyriz city). Geography, 16(58), 141-156.[Persian]
  25. Ries, AV., Voorhees, CC., Roche, KM., Gittelsohn, J., Yan, AF. & Astone, NM. (2009). A quantitative examination of park characteristics related to park use and physical activity among urban youth, J Adolesc Health, 45(3), 64-70. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2009.04.020
  26. Pourahmad, A & Habibian, B. (2018). Evaluation of factors affecting people's satisfaction with parks in Ahvaz city using the satisfaction-importance model. Spatial Planning, 8(2), 61-80. [Persian] https://doi.org/10.22108/sppl.2018.81102.0
  27. Salami, F., Sarver, R. & Ezzatpanah, B. (2021). The place of public spaces in the implementation of policies for the reconstruction of dysfunctional tissues: A case study of Imamzadeh Yahya (AS) neighborhood. Geography, 19(68), 83-101. [Persian] https://dor.isc.ac/dor/20.1001.1.27172996.1400.19.1.68
  28. Schetke, S., Qureshi, S., Lautenbach, S. & Kabisch, N. (2016). What determines the use of urban green spaces in highly urbanized areas? – Examples from two fast growing Asian cities, Urban Forestry and Urban Greening, 16, 150-159.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2016.02.009
  29. Solimani, M., Brati, Z. & Mansoryan, H. (2013). Measuring the quality of life in transition neighborhoods. Geography, 11(38), 51-76. [Persian]
  30. Taylor, L. & Hochuli, D.F. (2015). Creating better cities: how biodiversity and ecosystem functioning enhance urban residents’ wellbeing. Urban Ecosyst. 18 (3), 747–762. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-014-0427-3
  31. Taylor, L. & Hochuli, D.F. (2017). Defining greenspace: multiple uses across multiple disciplines. Landsc. Urban Plan. 158, 25–38.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2016.09.024
  32. Ulrich, R. (2006). Essay: Evidence-based health-care architecture, The Lancet, 368, 38-39.
  33. Vafadari Komarolya, D. (2022). Survey of Citizens' Satisfaction with Urban Parks in the Covid-19 Pandemic: An Online Survey. Geography and Human Relationships, 5(3), 31-43. [Persian]
  34. Vafadari Komarolya, D. (2022). The Role of Urban Green Spaces in Citizens' Welfare in Pandemic Conditions: A Review Study. Geography and Human Relationships, 5(2), 321-333.[Persian]
  35. Vafadari Komarolya, D., Kafi, M. & Khansefid, M. (2023). Investigating the Preventive Factors of People in the Society from Attending Urban Parks during the COVID-19 Pandemic. Journal of Horticultural Science, 37(1), 231-243. [Persian]https://10.22067/jhs.2022.75378.1143
  36. Vafadari Komarolya, D., Nazmfar, H., Hami, A. & Yazdani, M. H. (2024). Identifying of the aesthetic indicators of the urban landscape. Geography, 22(82), 149-164. [Persian] doi:  https://doi.org/10.22034/iga.2024.2036141.1318
  37. Wang, P., Zhou, B., Han, L. & Mei, R. (2021). The motivation and factors influencing visits to small urban parks in Shanghai, China, Urban forestry & Urban greening, 60, 127086. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2021.127086
  38. Wu, L. & Kyum Kim, S. (2021). Does socioeconomic development lead to more equal distribution of green space? Evidence from Chinese cities, Science of the Total Environment, 757, 143780. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.143780
  39. Wu, L., Kyum Kim, S. & Lin, Ch. (2022), Socioeconomic groups and their green spaces availability in urban areas of China: A distributional justice perspective, Environmental Science & Policy, 131, 26-35.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2022.01.008
  40. Yigitcanlar, T., Kamruzzaman, M., Teimouri, R., Degirmenci, K. & Aghnaei Alanjagh, F. (2020). Association between park visits and mental health in a developing country context: The case of Tabriz, Iran, Landscape and Urban Planning, 199, 103805. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2020.103805
  41. Yousefpour Dokhaniyeh, A. & Vafadari Komarolya, D. (2024). Analysis and recognition of design indicators for planting ornamental plants in urban green spaces. Journal of Natural Environment, 77(3), 537-549.https://doi.org/10.22059/jne.2024.379080.2693
  42. Zanon, D., Doucouliagos, Ch., Hall, J. & Lockstone, L. (2013). Constraints to Park Visitation: A Meta-Analysis of North American Studies, Leisure Sciences, 35(5), 475-493. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/01490400.2013.831294
  43. Zhang, J., Piff, P., Lyer, R., Koleva, S. & Keltner, D. (2014). An occasion for unselfing: Beautiful nature leads to prosociality, Journal of Environmental psychology, 37, 61-72. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2013.11.008
  44. Zhang, R., Peng, Sh., Sun, F., Deng, L. & Che, Y. (2022). Assessing the social equity of urban parks: An improved index integrating multiple quality dimensions and service accessibility, Cities, 129, 103839.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2022.103839